In a 14-page order, Wiseman also denied Maria Aurelia Ray’s motion for a judgment of acquittal which she filed in June after finding that sufficient evidence exists that Ray knew the illegality of the marriages.
Ray filed a supplemental motion on Oct. 15, 208 moving for a new trial on the grounds of newly discovered evidence.
Ray stated that the defense witness Hilario Angui admitted to lying during his testimony about multiple matters. She argued that there is a possibility that she would have been given a different verdict as the case of the government rested heavily on Angui’s testimony. The government argued that the newly discovered evidence is not material to the issue and will not produce a different verdict.
The motion was heard on Dec. 2 where Attorney Joseph Horrey appeared on behalf of the defendant. Assistant Attorney General Kathleen Busenkell represented the commonwealth.
Wiseman denied Ray’s motions after finding that she failed to establish a record of evidence to satisfy basic requirements.
“The court cannot grant a new trial because the defense witness is now prepared to testify truthfully. The granting of new trials should be used sparingly and with caution by the courts,” Wiseman said.
The judge said in his order that the decision to grant or deny a motion for a new trial is within the discretion of the trial court.
“A court may grant a new trial if the interests of justice so requires,” Wiseman stated. He added that to show prejudice, the defense must demonstrate how the lack of error would probably have changed the result of the case.
Wiseman said by the defendant’s own admission, she introduced the couples and discussed payment in exchange for her acquaintances to marry the friends of her husband from Bangladesh. The court maintained that Ray knew additional money would be paid for the procurement of green cards for her co-defendants.
Wiseman said the defendant was involved in multiple steps of arranging two sham marriages and she was the driver who made arrangements for her co-defendants to meet and fill out the needed paperwork when she knew that the couples getting married had no intention of living together.
Wiseman said there was scant evidence that the marriages Ray was arranging had any legitimate purpose, but arranged solely for the purpose of gaining immigration benefits to the friends of Ray’s husband.
In her supplemental motion for a judgment of acquittal filed on June 4, 2008, Ray argued she should be acquitted because there was no sufficient evidence to sustain a conviction of the offense.
She stated there was no evidence that she actually knew it was against the law for her co-defendants Saiful Islam and Munnaf Miah to enter into marriages.
Ray was convicted by a jury trial of conspiracy to commit marriage fraud and criminal solicitation on May 23, 2008. She was charged with three other defendants — Minto Minto, Islam and Miah in the marriage scam case.
Information showed that Ray and the other defendants unlawfully agreed to arrange marriages between Islam and Alisilynn Mallens, and between Miah and Severene Kosam for the purpose of obtaining labor and immigration benefits in March 2007.
